‘Batsh*t Crazy’ Trump Tariffs Should Be Seen as $7,000 Tax Hike on Workers, Says Economist

Spread the love

Original article by Jessica Corbett republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). 

Traders work on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange during morning trading on April 3, 2025 in New York City.
 (Photo: Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images)

Instead of strategically imposing tariffs, Trump has chosen to “give the country the most massive tax increase in its history, possibly exceeding $1 trillion on an annual basis.”

As stocks “nosedived” on Thursday, economists, policymakers, and campaigners around the world continued to warn about the impacts of U.S. President Donald Trump’s trade war, which includes a 10% universal tariff for imports and steeper duties—that he claims are “reciprocal”—for dozens of countries, set to take effect over the next week.

“This is how you sabotage the world’s economic engine while claiming to supercharge it,” wrote Nigel Green, CEO of the international financial consultancy deVere Group. “Trump is blowing up the post-war system that made the U.S. and the world more prosperous, and he’s doing it with reckless confidence.”

As Bloomberg detailed after the president’s “Liberation Day” remarks from the White House Rose Garden:

China’s cumulative tariff rate of 54% includes both the 20% duty already charged earlier this year, added to the 34% levy calculated as part of Trump’s so-called reciprocal plan, according to people familiar with the matter. The European Union’s rate is 20% and Vietnam’s is 46%, White House documents showed. Other nations slapped with larger tariffs include Japan with 24%, South Korea with 25%, India with 26%, Cambodia with 49%, and Taiwan with 32%.

In Europe on Thursday, “the regional Stoxx 600 index provisionally ended down around 2.7%,” while “the U.K.’s FTSE 100 was down 1.6%, with France’s CAC 40 and Germany’s DAX posting deeper losses of 3.3% and 3.1%, respectively,” according to CNBC.

In the United States, CNBC reported, “the broad market index dropped 4%, putting it on track for its worst day since September 2022. The Dow Jones Industrial Average tumbled 1,200 points, or 3%, while the Nasdaq Composite fell 5%. The slide across equities was broad, with decliners at the New York Stock Exchange outnumbering advancers by 6-to-1.”

data:image/svg+xml,%3csvg%20xmlns=’http://www.w3.org/2000/svg’%20fill=’none’%20viewBox=’0%200%20320%20286’%3e%3cpath%20fill=’rgb(10,122,255)’%20d=’M69.364%2019.146c36.687%2027.806%2076.147%2084.186%2090.636%20114.439%2014.489-30.253%2053.948-86.633%2090.636-114.439C277.107-.917%20320-16.44%20320%2032.957c0%209.865-5.603%2082.875-8.889%2094.729-11.423%2041.208-53.045%2051.719-90.071%2045.357%2064.719%2011.12%2081.182%2047.953%2045.627%2084.785-80%2082.874-106.667-44.333-106.667-44.333s-26.667%20127.207-106.667%2044.333c-35.555-36.832-19.092-73.665%2045.627-84.785-37.026%206.362-78.648-4.149-90.071-45.357C5.603%20115.832%200%2042.822%200%2032.957%200-16.44%2042.893-.917%2069.364%2019.147Z’/%3e%3c/svg%3e

Sorry, this content could not be embedded.

BlueSky

However, as Economic Policy Institute (EPI) chief economist Josh Bivens noted last week, “because most households depend overwhelmingly on wages from work as their primary source of income and not returns from wealth-holding, the stock market tells us nothing about these households’ economic situations.”

And Trump’s tariffs are expected to hit U.S. households hard, as the cost of his taxes on imports are passed on to consumers.

Tariffs can be a legitimate and useful tool in industrial policy for well-defined strategic goals, but broad-based tariffs that significantly raise the average effective tariff rate in the United States are unwise,” Bivens and EPI senior economist Adam Hersh stressed in a Thursday statement—which also called out Trump for mischaracterizing one of the think tank’s 2022 analyses.

“Further, the second Trump administration’s rationale, parameters, and timeline for tariffs have been ever-shifting,” Bivens and Hersh continued. “As the original post cited by the administration argues, tariffs should not be a goal unto themselves, but a strategic tool to pair with other efforts to restore American competitiveness in narrowly targeted industrial sectors.”

Instead of strategically imposing tariffs, Trump has chosen to “give the country the most massive tax increase in its history, possibly exceeding $1 trillion on an annual basis, which comes to $7,000 per household,” warned Center for Economic and Policy Research co-founder and senior economist Dean Baker. “And this tax hike will primarily hit moderate and middle-income families. Trump’s taxes go easy on the rich, who spend a smaller share of their income on imported goods.”

Baker—like various other economists and journalists—also took aim at Trump’s claims that the tariffs are reciprocal, explaining:

Trump’s team calculated our trade deficit with each country and divided it by their exports to the United States. Trump decided that this figure was equal to that country’s tariff on goods imported from the U.S.

Trump’s method of calculating tariffs is comparable to the doctor who assesses your proper weight by dividing your height by your birthday. Any doctor who did this is clearly batshit crazy, and unfortunately so is our president. And apparently none of his economic advisers has the courage and integrity to set him straight or to resign.

However, outside Trump’s administration, the intense criticism continued to mount, including from groups focused on combating the fossil fuel-driven climate emergency, which also endangers the global economy.

Andreas Sieber, associate director of policy and Campaigns at 350.org, said Thursday that “Trump’s tariffs won’t slow the global energy transition—they’ll only hurt ordinary people, particularly Americans.”

“Despite his claims he ‘gets’ economic policy, his record tells a different story: Tariffs are tanking U.S. stocks and fueling inflation,” Sieber added. “The transition to renewables is unstoppable, with or without him. His latest move does little to impact the booming clean energy market but will isolate the U.S. and drive up costs for American consumers.”

Allie Rosenbluth, U.S. campaign manager at Oil Change International, similarly emphasized that “Trump’s tariffs will hurt working families first and foremost, raising costs for essentials we depend on and threatening to plunge the U.S. economy into a recession. Though Trump pretends to care about the cost of living for ordinary people, his real loyalties lie with his fossil fuel industry donors.”

“If he actually cared about energy affordability, he would stop bullying other countries into buying more U.S. liquefied natural gas (LNG), which boosts the fossil fuel industry’s profits, but results in increased prices for domestic consumers and pushes us further toward climate catastrophe,” she asserted. “The one step countries can take to hit Trump where it hurts most is wean off their dependency on fossil fuels from the United States.”

The impact of Trump’s new levies won’t be limited to working-class people in the United States. Nick Dearden, director of U.K.-based Global Justice Now, pointed out that “Trump has set light to the global economy and unleashed a world of pain, not least on a group of developing countries that will suffer tremendous impoverishment as a result of his punitive tariffs.”

“All those affected must come together and stand up to this bully by building a very different international economy that promotes the interests of ordinary people rather than the oligarchs standing behind Trump,” he argued. “For all its scraping and crawling, the U.K. got no special treatment here, and the government should learn this lesson fast: They need to stop giving away our rights and protections in a futile effort to appease Donald Trump.”

Leaders in the United States are also encouraging resistance to Trump. U.S. Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said Wednesday that “this week you will read many confused economists and political pundits who won’t understand how the tariffs make economic sense. That’s because they don’t. They aren’t designed as economic policy. The tariffs are simply a new, super dangerous political tool.”

Murphy made the case that “the tariffs are DESIGNED to create economic hardship. Why? So that Trump has a straight face rationale for releasing them, business by business or industry by industry. As he adjusts or grants relief, it’s a win-win: the economy improves and dissent disappears.”

“But as long as we see this clearly, we can stop him. Public mobilization is working. Today, a few Republicans joined Democrats to vote against one set of tariffs,” he added, referring to a resolution that would undo levies on Canadian imports. “The people still have the power.”

Original article by Jessica Corbett republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). 

Neo-Fascist Climate Science Denier Donald Trump says Burn, Baby, Burn.
Neo-Fascist Climate Science Denier Donald Trump says Burn, Baby, Burn.
Elon Musk urges you to be a Fascist like him, says that you can ignore facts and reality then.
Elon Musk urges you to be a Fascist like him, says that you can ignore facts and reality then.
Orcas discuss Donald Trump and the killer apes' concept of democracy. Front Orca warns that Trump is crashing his country's economy and that everything he does he does for the fantastically wealthy.
Orcas discuss Donald Trump and the killer apes’ concept of democracy. Front Orca warns that Trump is crashing his country’s economy and that everything he does he does for the fantastically wealthy.

Continue Reading‘Batsh*t Crazy’ Trump Tariffs Should Be Seen as $7,000 Tax Hike on Workers, Says Economist

Trump Readies ‘Day One Climate Destruction Package’ After Raking in Big Oil Cash

Spread the love

Original article by Jake Johnson republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). 

Then-U.S. President Donald Trump listened to California Gov. Gavin Newsom at Sacramento McClellan Airport in McClellan Park, California on September 14, 2020. (Photo: Brendan Smialowski/AFP via Getty Images)

“The fossil fuel industry invested $75 million to secure Trump’s victory, and now they’re expecting a return,” said the executive director of Oil Change International.

The fossil fuel industry pumped tens of millions of dollars into President-elect Donald Trump’s successful bid for a second White House term—and it could begin seeing a return on its investment on his very first day in office.

Trump pledged on the campaign trail to be a “dictator” on day one in the service of accelerating U.S. fossil fuel production, which is already at record levels as nations around the world—including the United States—face the devastating consequences of planet-warming emissions.

Soon after his inauguration on Monday, Trump is expected to begin signing executive orders—some of them likely crafted by fossil fuel industry lobbyists—revoking climate-protection rules implemented by his predecessor and paving the way for new liquefied natural gas export permits, among other gifts to the industry.

Citing “several fossil fuel industry lobbying groups helping shape Trump’s energy agenda,” Business Insiderreported Thursday that Trump “could direct federal agencies to approve new terminals to export liquefied natural gas (LNG) and start unwinding restrictions on oil and gas leasing on federal lands and waters.”

The president of the American Petroleum Institute, the oil and gas industry’s powerful lobbying group, said earlier this week that his organization is “excited” about the prospect of Trump lifting the LNG pause.

study published Friday warns that a flurry of LNG terminal approvals would “deliver a windfall for U.S. fracking companies and exporters of liquefied methane” while “extending an export explosion that’s pushing up prices for American consumers while harming the climate and vulnerable communities.”

“Trump is handing these companies a blank check to expand their operations at precisely the moment we need to end fossil fuel extraction.”

Trump, whose Cabinet is set to be packed with fossil fuel industry allies, has also said he would immediately move to roll back President Joe Biden’s ban on offshore oil and gas drilling across more than 625 million acres of U.S. coastal territory—even though the law Biden used does not give presidents the power to undo previous offshore drilling bans.

In a statement on Friday, Oil Change International (OCI) listed a number of other actions Trump could take on day one, including withdrawal from the Paris climate accord, an emergency declaration to boost fossil fuel production, an expansion of drilling on public lands, and an attempt to revive the Keystone XL pipeline.

OCI dubbed the agenda “Trump’s day one climate destruction package.”

“The fossil fuel industry invested $75 million to secure Trump’s victory, and now they’re expecting a return,” said Elizabeth Bast, OCI’s executive director. “By appointing fossil fuel CEOs to key Cabinet positions and planning to dismantle critical environmental protections, Trump is handing these companies a blank check to expand their operations at precisely the moment we need to end fossil fuel extraction.”

“As Trump returns to office, we’re witnessing the deadly price tag of fossil fuel industry control over our democracy,” Bast said. “From the still-burning wildfires in Los Angeles to the destruction left by Hurricane Helene in Asheville, to the unprecedented droughts and floods devastating Southern Africa, the climate crisis is accelerating. These deadly disasters are driven by fossil fuel executives who put their profits ahead of our future.”

E&E News reported Friday that Trump “could sign somewhere between 50 and 100 executive orders” on the first day of his second term. One of the first targets, according to the outlet, will be Biden’s early executive order directing federal agencies to take part in a “government-wide approach to the climate crisis.”

Trump is also expected to take aim at renewable energy initiatives, including wind projects and an electric vehicle tax credit implemented under the Inflation Reduction Act.

In response to Trump’s planned actions, climate activists said the movement for a livable future must mobilize around the world and fight back in every way possible.

“One man and one election may temporarily cloud the horizon, but they cannot halt the relentless momentum of climate action,” Dean Bhekumuzi Bhebhe, senior just transitions and campaigns adviser at Powershift Africa, said Friday. “If anything, such moments are an invitation for historically polluting nations to step forward, not with the rhetoric of obstruction, but with the deeds of redemption. The world is watching, and we’ve seen enough bluster, now it’s time for genuine action. The stakes are no longer abstract, lives are being lost every day.”

Original article by Jake Johnson republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). 

Continue ReadingTrump Readies ‘Day One Climate Destruction Package’ After Raking in Big Oil Cash

‘Unacceptable’: Campaigners Decry Climate Finance Failures as COP29 Enters Final Hours

Spread the love

Original article by Eloise Goldsmith republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).

Activists demonstrate against industrial agriculture and agribusiness lobbyists on day eight at the UNFCCC COP29 Climate Conference on November 19, 2024 in Baku, Azerbaijan. (Photo by Sean Gallup/Getty Images)

“By the end of the UN climate talks, we must see at least a trillion dollars in public finance on the table,” said one campaigner.

As the clock winds down at the UN climate summit taking place in Baku, Azerbaijan, green groups are sounding the alarm Thursday following the release of a draft climate finance deal that they say falls short of what’s needed to support climate-vulnerable countries and adequately address the planetary crisis.

“The clock is ticking. COP29 is now down to the wire,” said UN Secretary-General António Guterres on Thursday, just a day before the two-week conference is set to conclude.

Finance has been a major focus of this year’s summit. Under the 20125 Paris Agreement, countries are supposed to come up with a “new collective quantified goal”—or NCQG in COP jargon—that will govern how much money from rich countries will be transferred to developing countries in order to help the latter cut their emissions and adapt to climate change.

No equivalent climate finance arrangement has been agreed to before, though countries at the summit broadly agree that richer countries, who are responsible for much of historic CO2 emissions, should help poorer and more climate-vulnerable nations deal with natural disasters and their transition to green energy.

The draft text that dropped early Thursday, however, was received poorly.

Oxfam International’s climate justice lead, Safa’ Al Jayoussi, said “COP29 must do more than simply repeat the same threadbare promises. Rich countries have spent decades now stalling and blocking genuine progress on climate finance. This has left the Global South suffering the most catastrophic consequences of a climate crisis they did not create. The draft text scandalously misses the crucial element of declaring a clear public commitment to a new climate finance goal.”

Instead of specifying how much annually should be funneled towards developing countries via climate finance, the NCQG draft text displayed “X” in place of any actual figures or monetary commitments.

Oscar Soria, a director at the Common Initiative think tank, told the Guardian: “The negotiating placeholder ‘X’ for climate finance is a testament of the ineptitude from rich nations and emerging economies that are failing to find a workable solution for everyone.”

“By the end of the UN climate talks, we must see at least a trillion dollars in public finance on the table,” added Andreas Sieber, 350.org associate director of policy and campaigns. Economists told the summit attendees last week that developing countries need at least $1 trillion annually by 2030 to deal with climate change.

A specific and shared concern from campaigners was the draft text’s inclusion of carbon market schemes as a way “to scale up” climate finance. While the draft promotes “high-integrity voluntary carbon markets” and other “instruments that mobilize new sources of climate finance and private finance” as part of the equation, critics have long warned that these market-based approaches are nothing but false solutions designed to benefit corporate investors, wealthier nations, and the fossil fuel industry itself.

“Labelling carbon credits as climate finance—which they are unreservedly not—should be axed from the text or risk creating a dangerous escape route for polluters. The same goes for explicitly allowing investments in fossil fuel infrastructure. This is fundamentally incompatible with the goals of the Paris Agreement,” said Laurie van der Burg, Oil Change International’s global public finance manager, in response to the draft text.

While Article 6 of the Paris Agreement allows for the international transfer of carbon credits, groups warned the changes in the COP29 draft would dramatically strengthen the foothold of such schemes.

“Shockingly, COP29 is set to agree to carbon markets that are even worse than the voluntary carbon markets,” said Kirtana Chandrasekaran, a climate campaigner with Friends of the Earth International. “We know these markets have failed. They are riddled with fraud and they do not reduce emissions or provide finance. Communities everywhere and, in fact, the planet itself is on the line.”

Without addressing these concerns, advocates of a meaningful deal at the conference say COP29 is headed for failure.

As 350.org‘s Sieber argued, paying the “historic debt that rich countries owe will enable all nations to take action on climate at home and meet the collective goal agreed last year at COP28—to triple renewable energy, and transition away from fossil fuels. Right now, we only see cowardice and a void in leadership, ignoring the undeniable science that we can’t keep polluting our planet with dirty oil, gas and coal.”

“The time to course correct is now—the European Union and other rich countries must stop playing poker with the planet and humankind’s future at stake,” Sieber added. “It’s time to put their cards on the table and commit real, transformative funding—no more excuses, no more delays, it’s time.”

Original article by Eloise Goldsmith republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).

Experienced climbers scale a rock face near the historic Dumbarton castle in Glasgow, releasing a banner that reads “Climate on a Cliff Edge.” One activist, dressed as a globe, symbolically looms near the edge, while another plays the bagpipes on the shores below. | Photo courtesy of Extinction Rebellion and Mark Richards
Experienced climbers scale a rock face near the historic Dumbarton castle in Glasgow, releasing a banner that reads “Climate on a Cliff Edge.” One activist, dressed as a globe, symbolically looms near the edge, while another plays the bagpipes on the shores below. | Photo courtesy of Extinction Rebellion and Mark Richards
Orcas comment on killer apes destroying the planet by continuing to burn fossil fuels. Second version, corrected text.
Orcas comment on killer apes destroying the planet by continuing to burn fossil fuels. Second version, corrected text.
Continue Reading‘Unacceptable’: Campaigners Decry Climate Finance Failures as COP29 Enters Final Hours

‘We Don’t Give Up’: Climate Groups Resolute as Shell Wins Appeal Against Landmark Ruling

Spread the love

Original article by Jake Johnson republiahed form Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).

A protester holds a sign with a Shell logo during a demonstration on March 11, 2023 in The Hague, Netherlands. (Photo: Michel Porro/Getty Images)

“This setback will only help us grow stronger,” said the Dutch climate group that originally brought the case. “Large polluters are powerful. But united, we as people have the power to change them.”

Climate campaigners didn’t sugarcoat their reactions to a Dutch court decision on Tuesday that overturned a landmark 2021 ruling ordering the oil behemoth Shell to cut its planet-warming emissions nearly in half by the end of this decade.

“We are shocked by today’s judgment,” said Donald Pols, director of Milieudefensie, the Netherlands-based environmental group that originally filed suit against Shell in 2018.

“It is a setback for us, for the climate movement, and for millions of people around the world who worry about their future,” Pols said of Tuesday’s ruling by the Hague Court of Appeal. “But if there’s one thing to know about us, it’s that we don’t give up. This setback will only help us grow stronger. Large polluters are powerful. But united, we as people have the power to change them.”

The original 2021 ruling, as CNBC noted, marked “the first time in history that a company was found to have been legally obliged to align its policies with the Paris Agreement” and “sparked a wave of lawsuits against other fossil fuel companies.”

Despite acknowledging that Shell has “an obligation toward citizens to reduce CO2 emissions,” the appeals court on Tuesday scrapped a legal mandate compelling the company to slash its emissions by 45% by 2030 compared with 2019 levels, saying it was “unable to establish that the social standard of care entails an obligation for Shell to reduce its CO2 emissions by 45%, or some other percentage.”

“It is primarily up to the government to ensure the protection of human rights,” the court added.

Laurie van der Burg of Oil Change International said in response that “while we mourn today’s setback, the ruling establishes a responsibility for Big Oil and Gas to act that future litigation can build on.”

“The court ruled protection against climate change is a human right, and corporations have a responsibility to reduce their emissions,” she added. “As far as we know, this is the first case where a court has acknowledged that new investments in oil and gas are incompatible with international climate goals.”

“Today’s ruling underscores the importance of world leaders now negotiating at the U.N. Climate Summit in Baku taking responsibility.”

Shell, which is responsible for just over 2% of global CO2 emissions, said in a statement that it was “pleased” with the court’s ruling and claimed to be “making good progress in our strategy to deliver more value with less emissions.”

But research by the human rights organization Global Witness has found that Shell has consistently overstated the scale of its investments in green energy—including by characterizing fossil fuels as “renewable.”

“Even as Shell claims to be reducing its oil production, it is planning to grow its gas business by more than 20% over the next few years, leading to significant additional emissions,” Global Witness wrote in a complaint to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission last year.

Andy Palmen, the director of Greenpeace Netherlands, said Tuesday that while campaigners working toward a just phaseout of fossil fuel emissions are “disappointed that Shell is being allowed to continue polluting,” they “will not give up the fight.”

“This only motivates us more to take action against major polluters,” said Palmen. “It really gives hope that the court finds that Shell must respect human rights and has a duty to reduce its CO2 emissions.”

“Today’s ruling underscores the importance of world leaders now negotiating at the U.N. Climate Summit in Baku taking responsibility,” Palmen added, referring to the COP29 gathering that kicked off on Monday in Azerbaijan’s capital city. “The summit in Dubai last year marked the end of coal, oil, and gas, now governments must come up with concrete plans to move away from fossil fuels.”

The Dutch appeals court’s ruling came in the wake of new research showing that oil and gas production surged to an all-time high in 2023—the hottest year on record.

“The oil and gas industry is not transitioning,” the environmental group Urgewald and dozens of other NGOs found. “In fact, 95% of the upstream companies on [the Global Oil and Gas Exit List] are still exploring or developing new oil and gas resources. This includes the oil and gas producers TotalEnergies, Shell, BP, Eni, Equinor, OXY, OMV, and Ecopetrol, which all claim to be targeting net zero emissions by 2050.”

Nils Bartsch, head of oil and gas research at Urgewald, said Tuesday that the 2023 oil and gas production record is “deeply concerning.”

“If we do not end fossil fuel expansion and move towards a managed decline of oil and gas production,” said Bartsch, “the 1.5°C goal will be out of reach.”

Original article by Jake Johnson republiahed form Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).

Continue Reading‘We Don’t Give Up’: Climate Groups Resolute as Shell Wins Appeal Against Landmark Ruling

As Biden Adviser Speaks at COP29, Green Groups Say Act Before Trump Takeover

Spread the love

Original article by Jessica Corbett republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). 

John Podesta, U.S. senior adviser to the president for international climate policy, speaks to the media during a United Nations climate summit on November 11, 2024 in Baku, Azerbaijan.  (Photo: Sean Gallup/Getty Images)

“President Joe Biden must reject all pending LNG export permits and stop the expansion of fossil fuels.”

As the U.S. senior adviser to the president for international climate policy addressed the United Nations summit in Azerbaijan on Monday, green groups urged the outgoing Democratic administration to do whatever it can to tackle the global crisis before Republicans seize control of the White House and likely both chambers of Congress.

“I want to address tonight a topic that is on everyone’s mind—the U.S. election,” John Podesta, President Joe Biden’s adviser, told the crowd in Baku on the first day of the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP29), less than a week after President-elect Donald Trump defeated Vice President Kamala Harris.

Although votes are still being counted, Republicans have secured a majority in the U.S. Senate and are on track to retain control of the House of Representatives—paving the way for Trump’s plans to roll back the Biden-Harris administration’s progress on the climate emergency and “drill, baby, drill,” which would lead to a surge in planet-heating pollution.

“Podesta’s speech must be followed by swift action to limit U.S. fossil fuel expansion and achieve a strong COP29 outcome.”

“For those of us dedicated to climate action, last week’s outcome in the United States is obviously bitterly disappointing,” Podesta acknowledged, “particularly because of the unprecedented resources and ambition President Biden and Vice President Harris brought to the climate fight.”

Noting that Biden pledged to halve emissions this decade, rejoined the Paris agreement, signed the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, and promised $11 billion in international climate funds, Podesta warned that “the next administration will try to take a U-turn and reverse much of this progress.”

“As President Biden said in the Rose Garden last week, setbacks are unavoidable, but giving up is unforgivable. This is not the end of our fight for a cleaner, safer planet. Facts are still facts. Science is still science,” he continued. “This fight is bigger than one election, one political cycle, in one country. This fight is bigger still.”

“We can and will make real progress on the backs of our climate-committed states and cities, our innovators, our companies, and our citizens, especially young people, who understand more than most that climate change poses an existential threat that we cannot afford to ignore,” he added. “Failure or apathy is simply not an option.”

https://twitter.com/pass_blue/status/1855977029885173929?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1855977029885173929%7Ctwgr%5E5aeb2c3e442822bdef98b9b393761ae5e7d8f1c7%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.commondreams.org%2Fnews%2Ftrump-and-climate-change

Sorry, this content could not be embedded.
X

Responding to the envoy’s remarks in a Monday statement, Collin Rees, United States program manager at Oil Change International, said that “if John Podesta and President Joe Biden are committed to doing everything possible to continue climate progress despite Donald Trump’s reelection, this moment demands a bold agenda that goes beyond locking in clean energy gains and takes real action toward a just transition off fossil fuels.”

“There is no shortage of critical work to be done before Biden leaves office,” Rees argued. “Here at COP29, the United States must support a new, transformative global finance goal in which rich countries pay their fair share in high-quality, grant-based finance and work to submit a Paris-aligned nationally determined contribution committing to do its fair share of climate action and phase out fossil fuels.”

In the United States, Rees argued, Biden must “finalize studies on the dangerous impacts” of new liquefied natural gas exports, “reject deadly projects like the Dakota Access oil pipeline and pending LNG facilities in the Gulf South,” and urge Congress to block the latest attempt by outgoing Sen. Joe Manchin (I-W.Va.) “to destroy bedrock environmental protections.”

Looking toward next week’s Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) meeting, Rees said that “Biden’s administration must support a global agreement to end export credit finance for oil and gas projects, a process which could end tens of billions of dollars in international finance for fossil fuels every year. This agreement would limit the global climate damages Trump and his fossil fuel cronies are able to perpetrate.”

“Podesta’s speech must be followed by swift action to limit U.S. fossil fuel expansion and achieve a strong COP29 outcome,” he stressed. Leaders at other climate organizations—who have often argued that Biden hasn’t gone far enough to tackle the fossil fuel-driven crisis—issued similar demands on Monday.

https://twitter.com/benjamingoloff/status/1855964481316151781?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1855964481316151781%7Ctwgr%5E5aeb2c3e442822bdef98b9b393761ae5e7d8f1c7%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.commondreams.org%2Fnews%2Ftrump-and-climate-change

Sorry, this content could not be embedded.
X

Emphasizing that “climate diplomacy on a boiling planet doesn’t stop for a climate denier,” Ben Goloff, senior campaigner at the Center for Biological Diversity’s Climate Law Institute, called on Biden officials to “use the next two months to set up a bulwark of protections and secure their climate legacy.”

“Beyond urgently getting IRA money out the door, John Podesta must commit the U.S.’s fair share of global climate finance and announce an ambitious NDC climate target,” Goloff said, referring to nationally determined contributions for the Paris agreement.

Biden, he added, “has to make good on last year’s agreement to transition away from fossil fuels by rejecting pending mega-polluting project,” and “should also act quickly to fill all federal judicial vacancies as a wall of defense to Trump’s rampage of legal attacks.”

Jamie Minden, acting executive director of the youth-led movement Zero Hour, also declared that “before Trump takes office, President Joe Biden must reject all pending LNG export permits and stop the expansion of fossil fuels.”

“Our climate is on the brink of collapse, and it is sheer madness that politicians continue to expand and subsidize deadly fossil fuels,” Minden said. “Young people are fighting for our planet because we are facing the worst consequences of the unrelenting greed of these selfish politicians.”

Original article by Jessica Corbett republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). 

Experienced climbers scale a rock face near the historic Dumbarton castle in Glasgow, releasing a banner that reads “Climate on a Cliff Edge.” One activist, dressed as a globe, symbolically looms near the edge, while another plays the bagpipes on the shores below. | Photo courtesy of Extinction Rebellion and Mark Richards
Experienced climbers scale a rock face near the historic Dumbarton castle in Glasgow, releasing a banner that reads “Climate on a Cliff Edge.” One activist, dressed as a globe, symbolically looms near the edge, while another plays the bagpipes on the shores below. | Photo courtesy of Extinction Rebellion and Mark Richards
Orcas comment on killer apes destroying the planet by continuing to burn fossil fuels. Second version, corrected text.
Orcas comment on killer apes destroying the planet by continuing to burn fossil fuels. Second version, corrected text.
Continue ReadingAs Biden Adviser Speaks at COP29, Green Groups Say Act Before Trump Takeover